Here are some notes I wrote when I started out with typst when comparing with LaTeX and some recent additions:
1. It doesn't generate 5 bloody files when compiling.
2. Compiling is instant.
3. Diagnostics are way easier to understand (sort of like Rust compiler suggestion style).
4. List items can be either - item1 - item2, etc. or [item1], [item2]. The latter is way better because you can use anchoring to match on the braces (like "%" in vim), which means navigating long item entries is much easier.
5. In latex you have the \document{...} where you can't specify macros so they need to be at the top, in Typst you can specify the macros close to where you need them. [I've been informed this is actually incorrect and Latex does allow you to specify macros anywhere]
6. It's easier to version control and diff, especially if you use semantic line breaks.
7. Changing page layout, margins, spacing between things, etc., footers with page counters, etc. just seems way easier to do.
8. Compiling with Typst is always one pass.
9. I'm not sure how this would compare with Latex but I'm starting law school in a month and I need to cite using AGLC4 which has a CSL (citationstyles.org) template supported by Typst; I have confirmed the CSL XML is correct but doesn't render properly in Typst. The workaround I found was to hand typeset my own citation and bibliography which sucks.
10. Most of what you need is built in to Typst and I've yet to need to import a package or template; even for the most basic documents with Latex you find you'll need to use many packages (such as fancyhdr for customised headers and footers).
11. Latex distributions can be a monstrosity, gigabytes in size like TexLive, and I acknowledge you can get slimmed down on-demand version such as Miktex. There's just one distribution of Typst and its pretty lean, although it might be nice to have multiple implementations in the future.
As for Typst 0.14 - I'm really happy about Accessible PDF feature and HTML export, will give each a whirl.
When I compile LaTeX files, I use tectonic¹ which automatically download dependencies, compiles in one pass, and hides temporary files. But the regulars users of LaTeX I know all use a web interface — IIRC, it's an instance of Overleaf² installed by their university, with real-time rendering.
So when I read your list, I had these tools in mind, and the only items that made sense to me were:
2. (minor compared to Overleaf) typst compiles faster.
3. Diagnostics are better.
4. (minor and arguable) Lists have 2 simpler syntaxes.
The other points were irrelevant (dependencies), wrong (macros) or really dubious (margins, Git, bibliography). I think Typst has many more interesting features over LaTeX.
> 2. (minor compared to Overleaf) typst compiles faster.
I would argue that this isn't minor. At least in my opinion, it makes a big difference.
Overleaf, already 3 pages into a document, with a couple of TikZ figures, was getting slow, as in multiple seconds wait for each save.
Typst, on the other hand (Tinymist in VS Code) is really realtime. Text updating within some tens of milliseconds, and figures included in far below a second. It really _feels_ instant, and to me that changes the experience a lot.
I have laptop with a good-ish CPU that is only a few years old, and on page 3 tinymist is already starting to struggle. There is a noticeable input delay between me pressing a key on the keyboard, and the key getting typed & the preview updating. I think it's more of a tinymist issue though, as it has no debouncing and apparently also runs the preview updates on the same thread as vscode's input handling.
Interesting. I have not experienced that, except when trying out the pre-release version of tinymist, and did some messy multiple view+cropping into a big pdf (testing out the new pdf-image stuff.) I chalked it up to it being new and beta.
Admittedly, I have still not created large documents in Typst.
Yeah fair enough, people have different experiences.
I would like to address that you read my point for margins/footers/etc. being difficult in Latex is dubious. (Also not sure why you mention the bibliography thing as dubious as it was a real issue of Typst, but shrug.)
A few years ago I spent many hours trying to figure out why a fancy footer wasn't rendering in a Latex document. I wanted a Page x of y counter in the footer which requires a few extra packages. So I try adding it, using two different methods \fancyfoot and \cfoot that I found on StackOverflow & OverLeaf, yet neither worked. I thought I was doing the incantations incorrectly. Spent endless hours figuring out what was going on, until I broke down and created a minimal example by selectively removing stuff which helped uncover that it was rendering but off page. The culprit was an overly large \fancyfoot that I hacked in to give a long baseline because I wanted to use up a huge chunk of the page due to Latex generous margins.
Yes I got things wrong, but Latex really didn't make this stuff easy, and took many hours to troubleshoot -- though it did improve my Latex troubleshooting skills.
In contrast setting layout parameters such as margins and specifying a footer is effortless in Typst and doesn't have that footskip footgun (at least I didn't encounter it):
Have only lightly dabbled in latex but Typst was super easy to pickup. I recently even published a whole book[0] in Typst. The process was straightforward for the most part. It took a little time to work out how to get page numbers alternating between the left and right side and a few other small formatting details but by and large it was very easy to create a beautiful PDF that's ready for printing.
Also, pandoc has fairly good support for Typst so I use that to create a docx (which Draft2Digital converts to epub). I even opened a few issues (https://github.com/jgm/pandoc/issues?q=sort%3Aupdated-desc%2...) for pandoc support and they were almost all resolved pretty quickly.
> It doesn't generate 5 bloody files when compiling
This was a question [0] I asked on stack overflow more than 15 years ago, and is to this day the most up votes I've gotten on SO. I still get notifications from it occasionally.
It really is so much better than LaTeX. I'm only saying this because I really enjoy using it. LaTeX was always tweak something, wait for the compile, and pray that it works, without having any clue about what was happening.
Here are some notes I wrote when I started out with typst when comparing with LaTeX and some recent additions:
1. It doesn't generate 5 bloody files when compiling.
2. Compiling is instant.
3. Diagnostics are way easier to understand (sort of like Rust compiler suggestion style).
4. List items can be either - item1 - item2, etc. or [item1], [item2]. The latter is way better because you can use anchoring to match on the braces (like "%" in vim), which means navigating long item entries is much easier.
5. In latex you have the \document{...} where you can't specify macros so they need to be at the top, in Typst you can specify the macros close to where you need them. [I've been informed this is actually incorrect and Latex does allow you to specify macros anywhere]
6. It's easier to version control and diff, especially if you use semantic line breaks.
7. Changing page layout, margins, spacing between things, etc., footers with page counters, etc. just seems way easier to do.
8. Compiling with Typst is always one pass.
9. I'm not sure how this would compare with Latex but I'm starting law school in a month and I need to cite using AGLC4 which has a CSL (citationstyles.org) template supported by Typst; I have confirmed the CSL XML is correct but doesn't render properly in Typst. The workaround I found was to hand typeset my own citation and bibliography which sucks.
10. Most of what you need is built in to Typst and I've yet to need to import a package or template; even for the most basic documents with Latex you find you'll need to use many packages (such as fancyhdr for customised headers and footers).
11. Latex distributions can be a monstrosity, gigabytes in size like TexLive, and I acknowledge you can get slimmed down on-demand version such as Miktex. There's just one distribution of Typst and its pretty lean, although it might be nice to have multiple implementations in the future.
As for Typst 0.14 - I'm really happy about Accessible PDF feature and HTML export, will give each a whirl.